Prerequisites for Admissibility of Claims in Civil Cases - A Comparative Analysis of European Countries and the United States

Abstract

The standards for claim admissibility in civil cases are crucial to the functioning of judicial systems, influencing how justice is administered. Both European nations and the United States impose specific requirements that must be fulfilled for a claim to be heard in court. These prerequisites reflect the unique legal traditions and procedural practices of each region. This paper explores the criteria for admissibility, offering a comparative analysis of the practices in European legal systems versus those in the U.S. This understanding is vital for legal professionals and scholars working in international contexts. The increasing backlog of pending cases in courts poses a significant challenge to the efficiency and effectiveness of judicial systems worldwide. This paper examines the impact of eligibility criteria for civil lawsuits on alleviating court congestion. By analyzing the criteria established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), including victim status, exhaustion of domestic remedies, timeliness, and the prohibition of abuse of rights, we explore how these prerequisites serve as filters that enhance case management. The study highlights that rigorous eligibility standards can deter frivolous claims, streamline the caseload, and promote the resolution of only substantive disputes. Moreover, the paper discusses the broader implications for judicial resources and access to justice, suggesting that well-defined admissibility criteria not only facilitate the prompt resolution of cases but also reinforce the integrity of the legal system. Ultimately, the findings advocate for a balanced approach that prioritizes both efficiency in court proceedings and the safeguarding of fundamental rights.